432
“Private moment” as in being out in public at a well attended event… How dare people hold her accountable for her actions and treat her as the vile individual she is? /s
She's also acting like it was some kind of spy video...
Wasn't it just like, normal security cameras that are always running?
for somebody who wants the government to be heavily into policing bedrooms she seems kind of upset that she's being shamed by the public.
That was only looked at in the first place because she was caught vaping in a crowded theater, then had the nerve to deny it and lash out at the workers for having the audacity to call her out on it.
My favorite part was at the end, when he simply ignored her and moved on.
It’ll be nice when she loses her seat. Some unwatchable “news” network might hire her, but eventually she’ll fade into obscurity, which is where she belongs.
Not a news network, she will be on OnlyFans.
load more comments
(1 replies)
That unwatchable news network might well be CNN to show the world just how “balanced “ they are.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"I don't believe there was disrespect. Things were absolutely taken out of context."
The old out-of-context handjob in a theater. Who among us hasn’t been taken out of context in that way?
Context was the brand of her date's pants.
Are those the new all season fashion condoms by Latex?
Here's the frame from the video showing her giving the finger to the staff, that's she's denying.
She was simply giving directions to the restrooms and utilizing her longest finger for visibility
LOL, the magabrains just hate it when they don't have a platform that just lets them lie and lie and lie.
The notion that someone can push back, even if ever so gently, triggers them endlessly. Beetlebert is such a snowflake.
“… I'm apologizing for you, Kyle Clark, for getting video and releasing that and people seeing it in a very private moment.”
lmfao.. these dipshits always try the uno reverse “no u” response and it literally never works. Reminds me of when MTG told a BBC reporter “you’re a conspiracy theorist”, cursed her out, and then stormed off. Boebert is just the pathetic screeching version of this instead of the roid rage version.
It's not a private moment? It's the audience of a musical production.
I agree, and the footage was from security cameras in very much so public places. That block of text was a quote.
No worries, I totally understood your position. It's just always shocking how Repubs feel so comfortable blatantly contradicting documented reality.
It’s just always shocking how Repubs feel so comfortable blatantly contradicting documented reality.
Because their voters don't punish them for it.
Al Franken was run out of the Senate because of the appearance of impropriety in a staged joke photo.
Republicans lost over 60 court cases about the "rigged" 2020 election, and yet they're still gonna nominate Trump again. He lied about Hillary, he lied about the wall, he still lies about the economy, but none of that matter because Republicans want it to be true. That's what you get with the "feelings over facts" party.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Are all debates in America just 2 people talking over each other so no one can understand anything?
I think the rules are typically negotiable in advance, especially when it's down to just 2 contenders.
Debates have the potential to show more than eloquence or intelligence, they also show soft skills like whether the candidate can control the conversation, control under pressure, how easily they succumb when bullied, and give the audience an opportunity to read their body language, which may develop (or remove) trust.
Biden famously told Trump in a debate: "would you shut up, man?" And in that moment quite a few Americans were swayed to select him believing he's not susceptible to getting run over by trump mouth diarrhea attack like so many other politicians are.
When there are republicans involved the debates devolve pretty quickly.
Unfortunately, way too many people view Gish Gallop style "debates" to be the only way to have a debate. Shouting someone else down is viewed as "powerful" and the sign of a real leader or something.
load more comments
(1 replies)
yeah its like the jerry springer model or something. People here argue and react; they don't debate.
The right cannot debate. They would get absolutely obliterated in a debate. The only thing they can do is get loud, sling insults and lie. It's like an adult trying to argue with a spoiled second grader that wasn't allowed to have desert after dinner.
And our "media" is complicit. This is only newsworthy because the moderator tried to press (heh) her instead of just letting her get her talking points (lies) in and moving on.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
I cringed so hard the inside of myself is on the outside and the outside is in the inside. I am now extroverted. Nice to meet you, we should hang out
As a cringetologist I have to inform you, that you actually turned yourself into a black hole and emerged from a white hole in this mirror universe.
Congratulations, you are now extroverted and trust me, you will need all the friends you can find up in here.
Can’t argue with that logic
Lauren Hoebert would argue about the color of the sky if a liberal said it was blue
These news sites have gotta be purposely using photos where she looks like a blowup doll.
It might just be difficult to get a photo of her that doesn't look like a hooting gibbon.
You're thinking of MTG
I literally was, in addition.
WTF is with those eyebrows!?!
They look like giant fake caterpillar stickers or something.
Respectfully, I think there are plenty of legitimate criticisms we can make without resorting to making fun of her appearance.
Edit for clarity:
Imagine if you were a woman who disagreed wholeheartedly with Lauren Boebert, and found her a wretched human being, but happened to look a lot like her. Then you see others who think like you do attacking her appearance.
Why would we create an environment that alienates people on anything other than ideological or moral grounds? The only people our criticisms should repel are people with dangerous ideologies that we don't want to be associated with.
No. She's an idiot and she looks stupid.
If it was something about her appearance she had no control over, then yeah. I agree.
But she made herself look stupid, and I'll call her stupid.
This comes off as a really sexist opinion. No one needs to change their appearance just because you don't approve of it. Bodily autonomy is a human right.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(8 replies)
The way she speaks it's like her words have no meaning. Nonsensical bullshit woman.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Kyle is so good in these confrontational situations. I wish more people got to see him but broadcast news is losing viewership...
load more comments
(2 replies)
Again, every time I see Lauren Boebert’s face, I just picture Sarah Palin running away from a bad taco truck, about nine months before Lauren’s birth. 🤷♀️
load more comments
(1 replies)
Absolutely fantastic, I loved how he just talked completely over her pointless blustering, without missing a beat.
I guess she doesn’t know what “expected level of privacy” law means yet. She will though if she tries to pursue it. Anything outside of a bathroom or private owned business you can’t sue someone for filming footage as you can’t expect privacy. Or maybe she knows this so caustic words is all she can think to do.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Kyle Clark is a Colorado treasure. I watched his show almost every night since 2018 until I moved out of Colorado. He is witty, insightful and just the right amount of sarcastic. I hope he is still on air when I finally go back home
HOOO-WEEEE, look at her go!
I love how some people have 'private moments' in public. It's like we don't matter on their planet.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2024
432 points (98.2% liked)
politics
19159 readers
4481 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS